D&D 5E Legends & Lore 4/1/2013

[Blackwarder]

Speaking of which:

New playtest packet is out!

No it isn't.

Warder

 

[Kinak]

To include Mines of Madness or is this another classic joke?

There is actually a new packet. Downloading it now.

So if it's an April Fool's joke, it's a particularly cruel one

Edit: Yeah, includes Mines of Madness and the 3rd level pregens. No other changes I can see.

Cheers!
Kinak

 

[Blackwarder]

Really? I still see the 3/20/2013 packet on the playtest page.

Warder

 

[Thac0 the Barbarian]

Looks like the only update is the addition of the minds of madness adventure.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

As GX.Sigma said, beginners and old-schooler are the target of the apprentice level idea. You're neither of them, and neither am I (except that I might want to play more old-school sometimes, and I might need to run the game for beginners as well), but why not wanting them in the target audience when we can still play our way starting at 5th instead of 3rd as in ed?

Well, kind of. You may start at 3rd level but, unless there are a change in multiclassing rules, any multiclassing will touch the apprentice levels, thus becoming common to the average gaming group.

I personally think that is a great idea. One that cannot be implemented by making the apprentice levels 0 and -1 (or whatever).

As to losing upper levels, the hope would be that the Standard Game caps at 20th level, but a rules module helps define further progression beyond that for those looking to play their characters longer.

 

[gyor]

later today I think it will be released, but all they will be adding is the mines of madness adventure think.

 

[Kinak]

Really? I still see the 3/20/2013 packet on the playtest page.

Warder

Kick off the download. You'll get the new one.

For what it's worth, they actually updated it on 3/21 as well (to include things like druidcraft) without updating the page.

Cheers!
Kinak

 

[TwoSix]

I'm more concerned with the leveling speeds they suggest in the article. Leveling every 2 sessions of play from 3-15, and every 3 sessions from 16-20th level? That's a total of 41 sessions to get all the way from 3rd level to 20th, or about 10 months assuming you play once a week. That's way too fast for my tastes.

Yea, but that's the sort of thing that's trivial to change by modifying XP gain. My group's longest campaign was 26 sessions, and that took over 2 years. So I support less overall levels or faster XP gain (depending on the level of granularity you want with ability gain).

 

[the Jester]

Also keep in mind that, as Mike describes it, apprentice levels are like the first few levels in Diablo 3, where you're level 3 before you even leave the first town.

Dislike.

 

[VinylTap]

I like the idea a lot. There are a lot of new DM's who like things like this spelled out, so I don't think its a completely unrealistic idea to give people guidelines "you should level up after x many sessions, on average", sometimes waiting too long can hamper momentum with a group of new. I can understand people's hesitation about "preconceived notions' and entitlements from some players, but it really is two separate styles of play, and I think its a good idea they address it.

I think a level zero is a more elegant way of handling this problem, but a level -1 feels really inelegant. One level is probably too few for a good gritty tier. I'm not sure how I'd handle it as a game designer, personally. Its a tricky thing but I'm glad they're working on it, especially if it works well with their multi-class system.